Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — Paul Millsap or Al Jefferson. It seemed like fate had decided one of them was bound to go somewhere as the Jazz bring in a young point guard. But the tale ended with the Jazz living happily ever after, for the rest of the season.
The NBA trade deadline has now come and gone. From the beginning of the season every media outlet and most other NBA teams expected the Jazz to make a trade. They didn't and now some people seem hurt, or just confused that nothing happened.
#poll
The reaction to the Jazz's trade wasn't all bad. A few people can see the big picture. The Jazz will have cap room and can adjust in the offseason while saving money. This didn't stop the majority from blasting the Jazz for not pulling the trigger on some rumors.
Sports Illustrated got a double dig at the Jazz. The first was in their "Saving the Skyhook" section by Quentin Haynes. Haynes listed the biggest losers of the trade deadline and the Jazz were the top of his list.
"The Jazz disappointed me for a couple reasons," Haynes wrote. "The first is that Millsap was thrown into trade rumors, and one, the Paul Millsap-Eric Bledsoe rumor, was very interesting. While I'm not a huge Eric Bledsoe fan, he would've been a long term solution at their point guard position. The second reason is this: Al Jefferson, no matter who pays him, will be getting overpaid this summer. Utah could've sold someone on Jefferson being the low-post presence they need to rent for the next two months. The third reason? The Jazz will have to pay Derrick Favors this offseason, and even though his PER 36 numbers are spectacular (15.4 points and 10.2 rebounds), I still would like to see him in large chunks of minutes."
Al Jefferson, no matter who pays him, will be getting overpaid this summer. Utah could've sold someone on Jefferson being the low-post presence they need to rent for the next two months.
–Quentin Haynes, of SI's Saving the Skyhook
These are very valid reasons. They are the basis for every trade scenario the people brought up for the Jazz. Is Bledsoe the answer? Can the Jazz see what they are getting from Favors? And how much will Jefferson cost the Jazz or another team?
Rob Manoney of Sports Illustrated piled on in regards to the Jazz's lack of a trade.
He said "Atlanta's choice to retain Josh Smith might be the biggest story of the deadline, but Utah's decision to keep both of its soon-to-be free-agent frontcourt starters is by far the bigger transgression."
"Jazz general manager Dennis Lindsey can't reasonably consider bringing back both players on new deals to reenact the same middling performance, lest the team continue to slow the development of Derrick Favors and Enes Kanter due to its veteran-heavy bent. Like it or not, those two prospects both figure to play prominent roles in the Jazz's future, a new era that could have been facilitated by clearing up the logjam now. Doing so wouldn't just clean the slate, but also add supplementary assets to a roster that's very much incomplete."
There is no real way of telling what was out there for the Jazz. The assumption of addition by subtraction was another key player in any trades. One writer, Jim Cavan from ESPN's Truehoop affiliate KnickerBlogger, talked about why he felt the Jazz should have made a trade on ESPN's "5-on-5" about the trade deadline.
"With the free-agent crop of point guards looking pretty bleak," Cavan wrote. "Utah could've dealt one of either Millsap or Jefferson -- both expiring -- for a point guard who is, how do I put this ... better than Jamaal Tinsley? While also cleaving open some rotational breathing room for Enes Kanter and Derrick Favors."
In fairness to Lindsey, we'll likely never know the details of deals the Jazz may have declined, and Utah has the flexibility to still try for a sign-and-trade this summer. But this was Utah's last best shot at dealing from a position with leverage, and yet the Jazz came away from the deadline empty-handed.
–Rob Mahoney of Sports Illustrated
There weren't many people that hated on the Jazz simply for keeping both Millsap and Jefferson. That seems to be a common misconception. If the Jazz didn't have the talent behind them there wouldn't be an uproar. People from all around wrote about them being wanted around the league.
But, if the coming offseason plays out right the Jazz might have made the right choice. Maybe even just by saying no they could have made the right choice.
Mahoney finished his Jazz segment with this. "In fairness to Lindsey, we'll likely never know the details of deals the Jazz may have declined, and Utah has the flexibility to still try for a sign-and-trade this summer. But this was Utah's last best shot at dealing from a position with leverage, and yet the Jazz came away from the deadline empty-handed."
To be fair, empty-handed means two players that are fringe All-Stars. Can the Jazz make a playoff push, an actual push that is. Will they win a game or two in the playoffs or miss the playoffs entirely.
The trading is done for the season. The Jazz have two first round picks, that look to be in the teens. Coupled with a future second round pick from Brooklyn the Jazz could still use some picks as assets to move around coming soon.
The offseason will feature the free agency of Dwight Howard and Chris Paul. The Jazz might not be players for either, but could benefit if a team needs to shed some cap space to make a run. The Jazz might have lost the battle, but the war isn't over.
